I'm Really Getting Annoyed!

[mattjames2010]

I keep seeing all these click bait articles about how the Cowboys running game is going to be a problem all year just because they only ran for 80 yards on Sunday.

Well guess what, the Cowboys were playing from behind, so those numbers will be skewed. No mention of that!

Also, the most expensive backfield in the league (Iggles) only ran for 63 yards. Where are all the articles about that? Yeah, they played from behind as well, but not a sliver of an article about Murray. Nothing.

Can you imagine if the Cowboys had Murray this year, and he only ran for 80 yards vs. the Giants? All the "experts" would be saying he's washed up, the Cowboys are doomed.

Don't click on the bait.

We were behind in games last year and still kept to the ground game and kept the clock in our favor. A good example of this is the Rams game, even in the blowout against the Eagles, we kept to the ground game.

We used the ground game last year to control the clock and set up the pass. Not the same as what we did Sunday night.

 

[viman96]

I keep seeing all these click bait articles about how the Cowboys running game is going to be a problem all year just because they only ran for 80 yards on Sunday.

Well guess what, the Cowboys were playing from behind, so those numbers will be skewed. No mention of that!

Also, the most expensive backfield in the league (Iggles) only ran for 63 yards. Where are all the articles about that? Yeah, they played from behind as well, but not a sliver of an article about Murray. Nothing.

Can you imagine if the Cowboys had Murray this year, and he only ran for 80 yards vs. the Giants? All the "experts" would be saying he's washed up, the Cowboys are doomed.

Don't click on the bait.

The worst part is they do not mention 200+ yards from scrimmage for the RBs

 

[Section446]

It's totally pointless to let it bother you, especially if you know that it's just click bait.

 

[dfan32]

The real reason for all of those articles everywhere.

Lol! You got me!

 

[MRV52]

Does anyone of us really care what they write about us.. I look at the standings and were 1-0 soon to be 2-0 Baby!!!!!

 

[plymkr]

Considering we are 3rd in total offense, and our RBs accounted for 200 yards of offense, I don't see it as a problem.

Facts are so harmful to the haters' emotional arguments. I'm sure ESPN left out those facts when dubbing our running game a failure after one week. what a joke

 

[BrassCowboy]

Considering we are 3rd in total offense, and our RBs accounted for 200 yards of offense, I don't see it as a problem.

I don't know why people keep mentioning that 'Rbs accounted for over 200 yards offense", that is mostly in the passing game and Dunbar was lined up as a WR most of that.
Not knocking the RBs believe me, just saying that that argument does absolutely nothing to quiet the critics because frankly we did only get 80 yards on the ground. The question is not whether that number is right, but why?
I also don't agree with the OPs argument that we were playing from behind and that is why we didnt run the ball as much. I have watched every single game last year and I can tell you we ran a heck of a lot more under worse circumstances.Against the Giants, we were never more than 10 points behind and 95% of the time no more than 3 points behind.
So the question is why did we give up on the running game?

Well I don't pretend to have the right answer, but I have ideas why. First of all, the "WCO" style passing to RBs, particularily Dunbar, was working real well. We were doing alot of those dink and dunks in the first half that not only myself, but several here have asked why we weren't passing downfield. It was a weird offense I have to say. Some of that was the fact that this team as a whole looked so lost as if they haven't played as a team in awhile. Took them awhile to get their feet under them. Line was not creating holes early on.

Everything I have watched leads me to think that all the early problems was just getting ther feet wet as a group and that now they will click as a team.

 

[xwalker]

I'm not buying it. For one we were not behind, at least by that much. We had a chance to go in at halftime up 13-3 and boom Beas fumbled, and then the ole' pass to Witten got intercepted.

We passed the ball a lot! It's not like we were down 21 or anything. Romo had 24 passes at the half which is right around what he averaged for the game last year.

We owned the clock because of sustained drives and Romo snapping the ball at 1 second the whole night.

I'm hoping it was just a game, and not a trend.

Randle + McFadden had 22 carries.

In game 1 last year Murray had 22 carries.

Murray had 7 games last year with 22 or less carries.

 

[Manster68]

The worst part is they do not mention 200+ yards from scrimmage for the RBs

I bet that the opposing coaching staffs will be aware of this when they game plan.
Well, maybe not Coughlin.

 

[viman96]

I bet that the opposing coaching staffs will be aware of this when they game plan.
Well, maybe not Coughlin.

No doubt coaches will be aware

 

[JoeBoBBY]

I loved the way they played and I don't understand how any fan can get upset with it.

We won the game first of all and we weren't gonna get back in the game by running the ball. McFadden and Randle aren't the type of backs you give the ball 25/30 times like Murray. They're finesse backs. Very good backs and we used all three of them like you're supposed to when you don't have a pure #1 type guy.

Just like teams like New England have over the years. We were down 10 points in the fourth quarter and the versatile passing game brought us back in it and yet people are still whining. Unbelievable. Be happy with the win and the fact we're showing some diversity finally.

Youre exactly right......................

"Be happy with the win and the fact we're showing some diversity finally."

Last year was too much running for you? The 12-4 record , playoff win? --- alrighty then.

 

[RunDMC]

Youre exactly right......................

"Be happy with the win and the fact we're showing some diversity finally."

Last year was too much running for you? The 12-4 record , playoff win? --- alrighty then.

Did I ever say that? No I said this team has a lot of versatility and it's gonna to see them using it because it makes the offense crisper and more dynamic overall.

It's not like we're not gonna run the ball, but if we hit some of those quick underneath routes. Getting the tight ends and backs involved early with the passing game that will open up running lanes for us.

 

[JoeBoBBY]

Did I ever say that? No I said this team has a lot of versatility and it's gonna to see them using it because it makes the offense crisper and more dynamic overall.

It's not like we're not gonna run the ball, but if we hit some of those quick underneath routes. Getting the tight ends and backs involved early with the passing game that will open up running lanes for us.

okay.. and I understand. sorry about that,


I get it, its a new offense. I hate the dinks and dunk offense. I just wanna pound the ball with the run game. --- But hey, as long as we win.

 

[CrownCowboy]

I'm not surprised about how the media is. They have always wanted us to fail and every year before the season starts they jump all over the Eagles like they are the best team in the last decade.

How wonderful would it be to win Sunday and shut em all up. Of course if that happens I'm sure they'll only hate even more.

 

[AdamJT13]

Randle + McFadden had 22 carries.

In game 1 last year Murray had 22 carries.

Murray had 7 games last year with 22 or less carries.

We ran the ball in the first three quarters almost exactly as much as we did last season.

FIRST QUARTER = Averaged 7.9 carries last season, ran it seven times Sunday.

SECOND QUARTER = Averaged 7.6 carries last season, ran it six times Sunday.

THIRD QUARTER = Averaged 6.9 carries last season, ran it eight times Sunday.

FIRST THREE QUARTERS = Averaged 22.3 carries last season, ran it 21 times Sunday.


For the people pointing to the Rams game last season, we ran it twice in the first quarter, eight times in the second quarter and seven times in the third quarter in that game, for a total of 17 carries in the first three quarters.

 

[dallasdave]

What are we ranked on defense

Good question !!!

 

[JD_KaPow]

I'm not buying it. For one we were not behind, at least by that much. We had a chance to go in at halftime up 13-3 and boom Beas fumbled, and then the ole' pass to Witten got intercepted.

We passed the ball a lot! It's not like we were down 21 or anything. Romo had 24 passes at the half which is right around what he averaged for the game last year.

We owned the clock because of sustained drives and Romo snapping the ball at 1 second the whole night.

I'm hoping it was just a game, and not a trend.

I think it's really hard to tell.

Our first drive was 17(!) plays. The first twelve were split evenly, 6 passes, 6 runs. The rest were passes. Let's look at those last 5:

2nd-and-10: pass. No surprise there.
3rd-and-5: pass. No surprise there either.
1st-and-goal from the 5: this is the pass that everyone's pointing to.
2nd-and-goal from the 10, after a false start: pass. No surprise.
3rd-and-goal from the 3: pass. Last year, we faced 3rd-and-3 25 times. We ran it twice, failing to convert both times.

Okay, so there was exactly one play on that first drive where one could question our commitment to the run.

Our second drive was 7 plays: 3 runs, 4 passes.
Our third drive was 8 plays: 4 runs, 4 passes.
Our fourth drive started with less than 3 minutes on the clock in the 2nd quarter. All Dunbar (I believe), all passes.
Our fifth drive (first of the 3rd quarter) was 10 plays: 5 runs, 5 passes.
Our sixth drive was 6 plays: 3 runs, 3 passes.
Our seventh drive was 3 plays: 1 run, 2 passes.
Our eighth and ninth drives were the comeback drives: all Dunbar, all passes.

I don't think the evidence is very strong that we're not balanced. I agree that it will be interesting to see how they call plays down at the goal line going forward.

 

[Deep_South]

It's hard to tell anything after only one game. But, if one does want to come to a conclusion based on what happened this week, Randle isn't as good as Murray was last year, but he's better than Murray is this year.

 

[coult44]

I keep seeing all these click bait articles about how the Cowboys running game is going to be a problem all year just because they only ran for 80 yards on Sunday.

Well guess what, the Cowboys were playing from behind, so those numbers will be skewed. No mention of that!

Also, the most expensive backfield in the league (Iggles) only ran for 63 yards. Where are all the articles about that? Yeah, they played from behind as well, but not a sliver of an article about Murray. Nothing.

Can you imagine if the Cowboys had Murray this year, and he only ran for 80 yards vs. the Giants? All the "experts" would be saying he's washed up, the Cowboys are doomed.

Don't click on the bait.

Yea didn't hear much about AD going for almost 31 big yards. Or Murray and Matthews racking up 10 combined yards. Lynch had 70 but couldn't get the big 4th and 1 when they need it most. The daunted rookie in SD had less than 50. Whats funny is that Josepth Randle is the 12th leading rusher in the NFL right now. WOW, did y'all know that? You would think we were dead last by the way folks are talking....

 

[Irvin88_4life]

9th in total defense

Thanks, I got to look it up right after I asked. Got a few spare moments from work lol